J  7    ,..   :^k;art:zc'iit  of  Agrtcuitur^  "—^ 

Office  of  Expe?~iment  Stations  y  35 

Library,    reserve  '      ^  no 

CONNECTICUT  Ho.  ^3  1 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 

NEW  HAVEN,  CONN. 


BULLETIN  231  SEPTEMBER,  1921 


Report  of  the 

Tree  Protection  Examining  Board 

By  W.  E.  Britton,  Chairman 

Miscellaneous  Notes 

By  E.  H.  Jenkins 


CONTENTS 

Page 

Report  of  Tree  Protection  Examining  Board 339 

An  Experiment  in  Top  Dressing  a  Meadow 351 

Certification  of  Babcock  Test  Apparatus ." .  .    351 

Sorghum  Juice 352 

Test  of  Perilla ■ 352 

Effects  of  Borax  on  the  growth  of  Potatoes,  Corn  and  Beans 352 

Timothy  as  a  Cover  Crop  for  Tobacco  Land 354 

Errata 35& 


The  Bulletins  of  this  Station  are  mailed  free  to  citizens  of  Connecticnfi 
who  apply  for  them,  and  to  others  as  far  as  the  editions  permit. 


CONNECTICUT  AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION 

OFFICERS  AND  STAFF 

October,   1921 


BOARD  OF  CONTROL. 

His  Excellency,  Everett  J.  Lake,  ex-officio,  President. 

James  H.  Webb,  Vice  President Hamden 

George  A.  Hopson,  Secretary Mt.  Carmel 

E.  H.  Jenkins,  Director  and  Treasurer New  Haven 

Joseph  W.  Alsop Avon 

Charles  R.  Treat Orange 

Elijah  Rogers Southington 

William  H.  Hall South  Willington 

STAFF. 
Administratioii.  E.  H.  Jenkins,  Ph.D.,  Director  and  Treasurer. 

Miss  V.  E.  Cole,  Librarian  and  Stenographer. 

Miss  L.  M.  Bbautlbcht,  Bookkeeper  and  Stenographer. 

Miss  J.  V.  Beeqer,  Stenographer. 

William  Veitch,  In  charge  of  Buildings  and  Grounds. 
Chemistry : 

Analytical  Laboratory.  E.  Monroe  Bailey,  Ph.D.,  Chemist  in  Charge. 

R.  E.  Andrew,  M.A., 

C.  E.  Shepard,  H.  D.  Edmond,  B.S.,     \.  Assistant  Chemists. 

Owen  L.  Nolan,  Richard  Merwin, 

Frank  Sheldon,  Laboratory  Assistant. 

V.  L.  Churchill,  Sampling  Agent. 

Miss  Alta  H.  Moss,  Clerk. 

Protein  Research.  T.  B.  Osborne,  Ph.D.,  D.Sc,  Chemist  in  Charge, 

Botany.  G.  P.  Clinton,  Sc.D.,  Botanist. 

E.  M.  Stoddard,  B.S.,  Assistant  Botanist. 

Miss  Florence  A.  McCormick,  Ph.D.,  Scientific  Assistant. 

G.  E.  Graham,  General  Assistant. 

Mrs.  W.  W.  Kelsey,  Stenographer. 

Sntomology.  W.  E.  Bbitton,  Ph.D.,  Entomologist;  State  Entomologist. 

B.  H.  Walden,  B.Aor.,  M.  P.  Zappe,  B.S.,  \  Assistant 
Philip  Garman,  Ph.D.,  )       Entomologists. 

John  T.  Ashworth,  Deputy  in  Charge  of  Gipsy  Moth  Work. 
Samuel  T.  Sealy,  Deputy  in  Charge  of  Mosquito  Control. 
Miss  Gladys  M.  Finley,  Stenographer. 

Forestry.-  Walter  O.  Filley,  Forester. 

A.  E.  Moss,  M.F.,  Assistant. 
H.  W.  HicocK,  M.F.,  Assistant. 
Miss  Pauline  A.  Merchant,  Stenographer. 

Plant  Breeding.  Donald  F.  Jones,  S.D.,  Plant  Breeder. 

P.  C.  Manqelsdorf,  Assistant. 
in  charge  of  the 

Tobacco  Station.  G.  H.  Chapman,  Ph.D.,  Windsor,  Conn. 


Press  of  The  Wilson  H.  Lee  Company. 


FIRST   REPORT 

OF    THE 

Tree  Protection  Examining  Board 

For  The  Biennial  Period  Ending  June  30,  1921.* 


By  W.  E.  Britton,  Chairman. 


For  many  years  men  have  traveled  about  the  State  and  in  various 
places  obtained  work  for  the  alleged  improvement  of  orchard  and 
shade  trees,  such  as  pruning,  spraying,  bracing,  filling  cavities,  or 
applying  fertilizers.  In  some  cases  good  ser\dce  was  rendered  and 
the  owners  were  satisfied ;  in  others  no  benefit  resulted.  Occasional- 
ly trees  were  positively  injured  by  the  treatment,  because  the  so- 
called  "tree  doctors"  did  not  understand  their  business.  Finally 
this  condition  existed:  tree  work  was  being  done  by  well-trained, 
intelligent  and  conscientious  men;  by  poorly  trained  but  reliable 
men;  and  worst  of  all,  by  unscrupulous  men  who  were  usually, 
though  not  always,  poorly  trained.  The  unsatisfactory  work  of 
the  unreliable  men  had  a  tendency  to  bring  the  whole  business  into 
disrepute.  Some  of  them  were  at  work  here  one  day,  but  the  next 
they  would  be  gone,  perhaps  forever,  only  to  be  followed  by  a  new 
crop.  Even  though  such  men  guaranteed  their  work,  the  owner 
could  obtain  no  redress  because  the  men  could  not  be  found. 

More  than  thirt}^  years  ago,  in  the  southwestern  corner  of  the 
State,  traveling  ''tree  doctors"  did  a  flourishing  business  by  boring 
holes  in  the  trunks  of  elm  trees  and  inserting  some  chemical  sub- 
stance which  they'  claimed  would  dissolve  in  the  sap  and  be  carried 
to  the  leaves  and  keep  the  trees  free  from  the  attacks  of  the  elm 
leaf  beetle.  The  price  was  seventy-five  cents  per  tree.  It  was  easy 
money  and  many  property  owners  "fell  for  it."  Needless  to  state, 
no  benefit  followed  the  treatment,  and  members  of  the  Station 
staff  removed  some  of  the  material  seven  years  after  it  was  placed 
in  the  tree,  and  apparently  none  of  it  had  dissolved.  A  chemical 
examination  showed  it  to  be  powdered  sulphur  and  some  kind  of 
grease,  two  substances  as  nearly  insoluble  in  the  sap  as  could 
easily  be  found. 

Now  such  transient  work  damaged  the  business  of  those  men 
and  firms  who  had  estabhshecl  a  reputation  for  intelHgence  and 


*  This  report  properly  belongs  in  the  Station  report  for  1921  rather  than 
in  this  Station  report  of  1920.  But  as  there  is  great  delay  in  issuing  the 
latter  it  seems  advisable  to  include  in  it  this  paper  rather  than  to  hold  it 
for  the  Station  report  of  1921. 


340  CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN    231. 

square  dealing,  and  after  due  consideration,  they  thought  best  to 
apply  for  legislation  to  regulate  this  condition  by  the  issuing 
of  licenses  or  certificates  to  qualified  workers. 

As  a  result,  the  following  act  was  passed  by  the  General  Assembly 
of  1919,  and  was  approved  May  2nd: — 

AN   ACT   CONCERNING   THE   IMPROVEMENT,   PROTECTION 

OR  PRESERVATION  OF  FRUIT,  SHADE 

OR  ORNAMENTAL  TREES. 

Chapter  181.     Public  Ads  of  1919.     (In  effect  July  1,  1919.) 

Section  i.  No  person,  firm  or  corporation  shall  advertise,  solicit  or 
contract  to  improve  the  condition  of  fruit,  shade,  forest  or  ornamental 
trees,  by  pruning,  trimming  or  filling  cavities,  or  to  protect  such  trees  from 
damage  by  insects  or  disease,  either  by  spraying  or  any  other  method,  with- 
out having  secured  a  certificate  as  specified  in  section  two  of  this  act;  and 
any  person,  firm  or  corporation  failing  to  comply  with  the  terms  of  this 
act  shall  be  fined  not  more  than  one  hundred  dollars;  provided  any  person 
may  improve  or  protect  any  tree  on  his  own  premises  or  on  the  property 
of  his  employer  or  on  any  property  within  the  limits  of  the  town  of  which 
he  is  a  legal  resident,  without  securing  such  a  certificate. 

Sec.  2.  The  botanist,  entomologist  and  forester  of  the  Connecticut 
Agricultural  Experiment  Station  shall  constitute  a  board  which  shall, 
upon  application  from  any  person,  firm  or  corporation,  examine  the  quali- 
fications of  the  applicant  to  improve,  protect  or  preserve  fruit,  shade, 
ornamental  or  forest  trees,  and  if  satisfied  that  the  applicant  is  qualified, 
may  issue  a  certificate  so  stating;  which  certificate  shall  be  valid  for  one 
year  from  the  date  of  its  issue,  unless  sooner  revoked  as  provided  in  section 
three  of  this  act,  and  may  be  renewed  by  the  board  for  succeeding  years 
without  further  examination,  upon  payment  of  the  fee  hereinafter  required, 
provided  any  person,  firm  or  corporation  receiving  such  certificate  shall  be 
responsible  for  the  acts  of  all  employees  in  the  performance  of  such  work. 

Sec.  3.  Said  board  shall  prepare  all  necessary  forms  and  prescribe  all 
rules  and  regulations  governing  examinations,  and  any  certificate  issued 
under  the  provisions  of  this  act  may  be  revoked  by  it  upon  proof  that 
improper  methods  have  been  used  or  for  other  sufficient  cause. 

Sec.  4.  Each  applicant  for  an  examination  shall  pay  a  fee  of  five 
dollars  in  advance,  and  a  fee  of  two  dollars,  for  each  certificate  or  renewal 
issued;  which  fees  may  be  expended  by  the  board  for  any  expense  incurred 
by  it  in  making  examinations  or  issuing  certificates,  and  an  account  of  all 
receipts  and  expenditures  under  this  act  shall  be  rendered  annually  to  the 
state    comptroller. 

As  the  botanist,  entomologist,  and  forester  of  this  Station  were 
named  to  constitute  a  Board,  a  meeting  of  this  Board  was  held  on 
June  14th,  and  organized  by  electing  as  Chairman,  W.  E.  Britton, 
Entomologist,  and  as  Secretary  and  Treasurer,  W.  O.  Filley,  For- 
ester. The  Board  also  drew  up  the  following"rules  and  regulations 
according  to  the  provisions  of  the  law : — 

Examination  Rules  and  Regulations. 

I.  Each  person,  firm  or  corporation  required  to  secure  a  certificate 
under  Chapter  181,  Pubhc  Acts  of  1919,  shall  be  examined  as  follows: 
When  a  firm  is  under  control  of  one  person  who  is  solely  responsible  for 
the  contracts,  methods  and  oversight  of  each  piece  of  work,  this  person 


EXAMINATION  OF  TREE  EXPERTS.  341 

alone  may  be  required  to  pass  the  examination,  but  when  more  than  one 
person  is  responsible  for  the  methods  of  work  and  oversight  of  same,  each 
shall  be  required  to  take  the  examination.  When- foremen  or  others  are 
given  complete  charge  of  recommending  and  applying  treatments,  they 
shall  also  be  required  to  take  the  examination,  in  so  far  as  it  relates  to 
their  work.  The  Examining  Board  shall  decide  who  shall  be  required  to 
take  the  examination. 

II.  Unless  otherwise  arranged,  candidates  for  certificates  shall  appear 
for  examination  at  the  Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  at 
New  Haven,  at  such  times  as  shall  be  designated  by  the  Board. 

III.  Examinations  may  be  oral,  written,  or  both,  as  shall  be  deter- 
mined by  the  Examining  Board,  and,  in  general,  shall  cover  tree  species, 
tree  life  and  growth;  diseases  and  insect  pests  of  trees,  with  treatment  for 
same;  pruning  and  tree  surgery. 

IV.  Candidates  prior  to  the  time  of  examination  shall  furnish  a  type- 
written statement  of  their  qualifications  as  follows: — 

1.  General  education. 

2.  Special  training  for  tree  protection  work. 

3.  Experience    in    tree    protection    work.      The    latter    shall    include 

(a)  Place  of  business,  name  of  firm  and  position  now  held. 

(b)  Previous  positions  held. 

(c)  Total  length  of  experience. 

(d)  Contracts  now  under  way  or  completed  during  the  past  12 

months. 

In  addition  three  or  more  recommendations  as  to  reliabiUty  and  effi- 
ciency shall  be  furnished;  and  where  typed  or  printed  forms  of  contracts, 
regulations,  etc.,  are  used,  these  shall  also  be  supplied,  or  if  not  available, 
statements  shall  be  made  concerning  the  same. 

V.  If  satisfied  with  the  qualifications  of  the  applicant,  the  Board  will 
issue  a  certificate  good  for  the  succeeding  twelve  months  (unless  revoked 
for  cause),  then  to  be  renewed  upon  application  under  such  conditions  as 
the  Examining  Board  may  require  in  each  case. 

VI.  Upon  evidence  of  unfitness  in  training  or  improper  business 
methods,  the  Examining  Board  may  refuse  to  issue  a  certificate  or  cancel 
one  that  has  been  issued.  Complaints  may  be  made  to  the  Board  on 
these  points,  and  if  deemed  desirable  by  the  Board,  private  hearings  of 
the  interested  parties  shall  be  held. 

The  new  measure  became  a  law  on  May  2nd,  but  it  did  not  take 
effect  until  July  1,  1919.  In  order  to  give  the  tree  men  a  chance 
to  meet  the  provisions  of  the  law,  two  examinations  were  held 
before  the  law  became  operative:  one  on  June  27th  and  one  on 
June  30th.  Four  examinations  were  held  in.  July,  on  the  9th,  12th, 
16th  and  23rd,  respectively. 


342         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN    231. 

The  form  of  application  used  is  as  follows: — 


19 


I, hereby  make  application 

,     ry,       ri  •       T-        •  •       r,       1   r      an  examination         .^ 

to  the  1  ree  rrotection  hxammmg  hsoard,  ror  ,  certih- 

a  renewal 

cate,  as  provided  in  Chapter  181,  Public  Acts  of  1919. 

I  enclose  fee  of  $ as  required  by  law. 


Applicant 


Address 


Fee  for  Examination  Certificate;   $5.00 
"     "    Renewal  Certificate  $2.00 


^  The  law  provides  that  the  fee  shall  be  paid  in  advance.  In  most 
cases  a  check  for  five  dollars  was  received  by.  mail,  but  in  some 
cases  the  applicants  were  allowed  to  make  payment  at  the  time 
of  the  examination. 

EXAMINATIONS 

The  Board  expected  and  preferred  to  hold  examinations  rather 
infrequently  and  to  have  each  one  well  attended.  But  though  the 
new  law  and  notices  of  the  examinations  were  at  first  mentioned 
in  the  newspapers,  only  a  few  candidates  were  present  at  most  of 
the  examinations.  Some  of  the  applicants  were  unable  to  be 
present  on  any  of  the  dates  set  and  asked  for  another  date  in  the 
near  future.  It  often  happened  that  an  application  would  be 
received  a  few  days  following  an  examination,  with  a  request  for 
an  examination  at  an  early  date.  Tliis  explains  the  reason  for 
holding  so  many  examinations  in  attempting  to  accomodate  the 
applicants. 

During  the  two  years  covered  by  this  report,  twenty  examina- 
tions were  held  on  the  dates  given  below : — 

In  1919:  June  27  and  30;  July  9,  12,  16  and  23;  August  1;  September  17; 

October  29;  November  19. 
In  1920:  January  28;  March  17  and  31;  May  5;  June  7  and  17;  September 

15;  December  6. 
In  1921:  February  28  and  May  11. 


EXAMINATION  OF  TREE  EXPERTS.  343 

The  examination  has  consisted  of  written  answers  to  certain 
fundamental  questions,  selected  to  show  the  appHcants'  knowledge 
of  the  subject.  In  addition  to  these  answers,  each  appUcant  was 
asked  oral  questions  by  each  member  of  the  Board,  and  he  was 
told  whether  his  answers  were  right  or  wrong,  and  if  wrong, 
wherein  they  were  wrong.  Several  different  sets  of  written  ques- 
tions have  been  used  in  the  course  of  these  examinations,  and  one 
of  these  is  given  below  as  a  sample: — 

TREE  PROTECTION  EXAMINING  BOARD. 

EXAMINATION  QUESTIONS. 
(Please  indicate  by  number  each  question  answered.) 

A.  Injurious  Insects     (Answer  both.) 

(1)  Explain  the  purpose  of  an  insecticide,  name  examples  of  the 
common  types,  and  specify  how  they  are  used. 

(2)  Describe  briefly  the  difference  between  sucking  and  chewing 
insects,  explain  how  each  may  injure  trees  and  give  remedies 
for  each. 

(Answer  any  two.) 

(3)  What  are  the  three  principal  types  of  insect  injury  to  trees? 
Give  an  example  of  each  with  remedy. 

(4)  How  and  when  would  you  treat  elm  trees  as  a  protection 
against  the  ravages  of  the  elm  leaf  beetle? 

(5)  What  are  the  chief  insect  pests  of  the  apple  orchard,  and 
what  treatment  is  commonly  recommended  for  each? 

(6)  Give  a  brief  account  of  the  maple  borer  and  how  to  combat  it. 

B.  Tree  Diseases.     (Answer  three  out  of  the  five.) 

(7)  What  are  fungi?  Give  several  examples.  How  do  they 
reproduce?    How  does  a  parasite  differ  from  a  saprophyte? 

(8)  What  kinds  of  injury  to  trees  are  caused  by  the  following: 
Sun  scorch?  Drought?  Ice  storms?  Late  frosts?  Lightning? 
Animals   (including  man)? 

(9)  What  different  fungous  diseases  have  you  tried  to  control 
and  by  what  methods? 

(10)  What  causes  decay  of  wood  in  trees  and  how  would  you 
control  it? 

(11)  What  is  a  fungicide?  Name  four  kinds.  Give  theorj'^  of 
spraying  against  fungi.  How  is  Bordeaux  mixture  made? 
Distinguish  between  a  fungicide  and  an  insecticide. 

C.  Tree  Surgery.     (Answer  any  three.) 

(12)  Describe  in  detail  the  way  you  would  remove  a  large  limb 
and  the  treatment  you  would  give  the  resulting  cut  surface  if 
undecayed. 

(13)  Discuss  the  relative  merits  of  filled  cavities  and  open  cavities, 
stating  under  what  conditions  you  would  recommend  one  or 
the  other. 

(14)  Describe  your  method  of  filling  cavities,  giving  the  reason 
for  each  operation. 

(15)  What  may  be  done  to  hasten  the  healing  of  wounds  and  the 
growing  over  of  filled  cavities? 

(16)  Discuss  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  the  different 
methods  of  strengthening  weak  trees. 


344         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN   231. 

D.  Tree  Life  and  Growth.     (Answer  one.) 

(17)  Discuss  the  growth  of  a  tree,  indicating  where  and  when 
growth  takes  place,  also  the  manner  in  which  the  roots  and 
leaves    perform    their    work. 

(18)  Describe  the  way  in  which  water  and  food  materials  are 
secured  by  a  tree,  and  how  they  are  utilized  by  it. 

E.  Tree  Species. 

(19)  Identify  the  specimens  on  the  table,  giving  the  common 
name  of  each  as  numbered. 

Altogether  65  candidates  took  the  examinations.  Of  this  number 
61  were  finally  granted  certificates,  four  of  them  being  required 
to  take  a  second  examination.  Four  applicants  were  refused 
certificates  because  the  Board  did  not  consider  them  quahfied. 

Certificates 

The  form  of  the  regular  certificate  adopted  by  the  Board  is  as 
follows : — 


CERTIFICATE 

FROM 

^xn  frntotton  lExamttitng  Inarb 


9  FROM 

9 


STATE  OF  CONNECTICUT 


9 

9 
9 
9 
9 
9 

I  • 

9 


T5\)is  Is  to  (Tertlf:?  that .  * 


9  9 

of has  been  duly  examined  in  compliance  with  the  provisions 

of  Chapter  181,  Public  Acts  of  1919,  and  is  considered  qualified  to  conduct  the  business  of  pro- 


* 

^  tecting  trees.                                                                                                              ,                                  S 

9  \              9 

^        No..  .. Entomologist,  CAa/rman  J  ^ 

a&  f  Examining        3L 

9j^        Date Forester,  Sec'y-Treas.     /     Board  9k 

t  1            S 

5^        Expires ..  .„..,.- „ _.... Bolanirt  I  ^ 

*  CONNECTICUT  AGRICULTURAL  EXPERIMENT  STATION                                         •           • 

S  NEW  HAVEN,  CONNECTICUT                                                                                              S 


LIST   OF   THOSE   RECEIVING    CERTIFICATES. 


345 


A  small  card  shown  below  was  furnished  for  each  foreman 
employed  by  a  firm  receiving  a  regular  certificate: — 


Bt^U  of  (Eotttterttrut 

TREE  PROTECTION  EXAMINING  BOARD 


THE  BEARER 
is  working  under  supervision  of  and  is  responsible  to 

ot Conn., 

to  whom  this  board  has  issued  Certificate  No as  provided  by  Chapter 

181 ,  Public  Acts  of  1919.     Said  Certificate  expires 

CONNECTICUT  AGRICULTURAL 

EXPERIMENT  STATION  

NEW  HAVEN.  CONN.  Secretary 


Up  to  this  time  no  certificate  has  been  revoked  although  several 
holders  have  failed  to  renew.  The  list  of  individuals  and  firms 
receiving  certificates  between  July  1,  1919,  and  June  30,  1921, 
together  with  number  and  date  of  each  certificate  and  date  of 
renewal,  is  given  below — 

LIST  OF  FIRMS  AND  INDIVIDUALS  RECEIVING  CERTIFICATES 

FOR  TREE  WORK. 


Biennial  Period  Ending  June  30,   1921. 


Name 

Armstrong,  Edward  H. 

Baldwin,  Thomas  J.,  Jr. 

Bartlett  Co.,  F.  A., 
(F.  A.  Bartlett) 

Beaupain  &  Saunders, 
(Harry  F.  Beaupain) 

BertoU  Bros., 

(August  C.  Bertolf) 

Brown,  Edgar  M. 

Cardarelli,  B.  J. 

Clark,  Wyllis  S. 

Clyne,  G.  A. 

Condon,  Maurice  L. 

Conn.  Forestry  Co., 
(Walter  S.  Crosby) 

Dept.  Pomology,  Conn. 
Agr.  College,  (S.P. 
HoUister) 

Davey  Tree  Expert  Co., 
(Charles  T.  Burks) 
(Geo.  J.  Champlain) 
(Felix  H.  Caldwell) 
(John  C.  G.  DeWolf) 
(Peter  Gammie) 
(Walter  O.  Noyes) 
(Harold  A.  Horn) 


Certificate 

Date 

Date  of 

Address 

NumDer 

Issued 

Renewal 

Branford,  Ct. 

34 

Sept.  18,  1919 

Not   renewed 

Guilford,  Ct. 

. 

21 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,  1920 

Stamford,  Ct. 

•    10 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,  1920 

So.  Norwalk, 

Ct. 

27 

Aug.  13,  1919 

Aug.  12,  1920 

Sound  Beach, 

Ct. 

24 

July  30,  1919 

July  29,  1920 

Hartford,  Ct. 

52 

June  7,  1920 

June  6,   1921 

Cromwell,  Ct 

57 

Mar.  1,  1921 

New  Canaan, 

Ct. 

20 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,  1920 

West  Cheshire,  Ct. 

5 

July    2,  1919 

July     1,  1920 

Lake  Mahopac,  N.  Y. 

46 

Feb.  3,  1920 

Feb.   2,    1921 

West  Haven, 

ct. 

29 

Sept.  18,  1919 

Sept.  17,  1920 

Storrs,  Ct. 

47 

Mar.  22,  1920 

Mar.  21,  1921 

Kent,  Ohio 

Stamford,  Ct. 

59 

May  27,  1921 

Kent,  Ohio 

13 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,   1920 

Kent,  Ohio 

15 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,  1920 

Kent,  Ohio 

14 

July  16,  1919 

July  15,  1920 

Kent,  Ohio 

60 

May  27,  1921 

Danbury,  Ct. 

28 

Sept.  18,  1919 

Not    renewed 

Kent,  Ohio 

49 

April  5,  1920 

Not   renewed 

346         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN   231. 


Name 

Desmond,  Thomas  H. 
Dunlop,  Daniel  S. 
Easton,  Clifford  H. 
Elm  City  Nursery  Co., 

(W.  E.  Campbell) 
Gavitt,  Lester  E. 
Gilbert,  J.  E. 
Goodwin  Associates,  The 

James  L.  (Edward  E. 

Pettee) 

(James  L.  Goodwin) 
Hartford  Forestry  Co., 

(Philip  Hansling,  Jr.) 

(Philip  Hansling) 
Herthal,  Gus,  Jr. 
Herthal,  G.  F. 
Homewood  Forestry  Co., 

(Peter  J.  Belletti) 
Hunt  Co.,  W.  W., 

(W.  A.  Wright) 
Jaynes,  H.  A., 

Conn.  Tree  Surgery  Co.  Storrs,  Ct 


Address 
Simsbury,  Ct. 
Cromwell,  Ct. 
New  York,  N.  Y 

New  Haven,  Ct. 
Westerly,  R.  I. 
New  Haven,  Ct. 


Hartford,  Ct. 
Hartford,  Ct. 

Hartford,  Ct. 
Hartford,  Ct. 
Bridgeport,  Ct. 
Bridgeport,  Ct. 

Waterbury,  Ct. 

Hartford,  Ct. 


Kelley,  James  J 
Kellner  &  Son, Herman  H 

(Arthur  H.  Kellner) 
Landscape  Foresters  Ltd. 

(C.  E.  Mager) 
Mallett  Co.,  George  A., 

(George  A.  Mallett) 
Markham,  W.  R. 
McLain  &  Co.,  J.  A., 

(J.  A.  McLain) 
McLeod,  Donald 
Meader  Co.,  L.  H., 

(Lewis  H.  Meader,  Jr.)  Providence,  R.  I 
Millane  Tree  Expert  Co 

(Neil  A.  Millane) 
Morris,  Harry  H. 
Munson  Whitaker  Co., 

(Robert  O'Shea) 
Nichol,  James 

(Fred  B.  Bartlett) 
Old  Colony  Forestry  Co. 

(Thos.  J.  McGLnnis) 
O'Meara,  Harry  J. 
Palmer,  Arthur  J. 
Pauley  Tree  Expert  Co.. 

(George  A.  Pauley,  Jr.)  New  Canaan,  Ct. 
Quahty  Seed  Store, 


New  Canaan,  Ct. 
Danbury,  Ct. 


New  York,  N.  Y. 

Bridgeport,  Ct. 
Middletown,  Ct. 

Stamford,  Ct. 
Cromwell,  Ct. 


Middletown,  Ct. 
Danbury,  Ct. 

Boston,  Mass. 

Greenwich,  Ct. 

West  Haven,  Ct. 
Stamford,  Ct. 
West  Haven,  Ct. 


(William  J.  Rice) 
Rich,  Nehemiah  L. 
Schoonman,  W.  J. 
Shaw,  Walter 
Sierman,  C.  H. 
Smith,  Joseph  P. 
Van  Heiningen,  Jacob  C. 
Verkade,  H. 
Wilcox,  Reginald  C. 
Wright,  John  L. 
Zack,  Harry  J. 


Stamford,  Ct. 
Stamford,  Ct. 
New  London,  Ct. 
Westville,  Ct. 
Hartford,  Ct. 
Stamford,  Ct. 
So.  Wilton,  Ct. 
New  London,  Ct. 
Essex,  Ct. 
Putnam,  Ct. 
Chester,  Ct. 


Certificate 
Number 

50 

58 
53 

7 
51 
61 


38 
39 

16 
17 
36 
25 

41 

33 

56 
19 
26 


Date 
Issued 


Date  of 
Renewal 


11 
23 

37 
54 


1 

40 


4 
35 

2 


9 

3 

6 

55 

8 
44 
48 
18 
30 
43 
45 


April  5,  1920 
March  1,  1921 
June  17,  1920 


April  4,   1921 
June  16,  1921 


July  2,  1919  July    1,    1920 

May  10,  1920       May  9,    1921 
May  27,  1921 


Nov.  7,  1919 
Nov.  7,  1919 

July  16,  1919 
July  16,  1919 
Sept.  18,  1919 
July  30,  1919 

Nov.  7,  1919 

Sept.  18,  1919 

Aug.  6,  1920 
July  16,  1919 
Aug.  13,  1919 


Nov.  6,  1920 
Nov.  6,  1920 

July  15,  1920 
July  15,  1920 
Sept.  17,  1920 
July  29,  1920 

Nov.  6,  1920 

Sept.  17,  1920 


July  15,  1920 
Aug.  12,  1920 


32    Sept.  18,  1919   Sept.  17,  1920 


July  16,  1919 
July  30,  1919 

Sept.  18,  1919 
June  17,  1920 


July  15,  1920 
July  29,  1920 

Sept.  17,  1920 
Not  renewed 


31    Sept.  IS,  1919   Sept.  17,  1920 


July  2,  1919 
Nov.  7,  1919 


July  1,  1920 
Nov.  6,  1920 


42    Nov.  26,  1919   Nov.  25,  1920 
12    July  16,  1919   July  15,  1920 


July  2,  1919 
Sept.  18,  1919 
July  2,  1919 


July  1,  1920 
Sept.  17,  1920 
July  1,  1920 


22    July  30,  1919   July  29,  1920 


July  2,  1919 
July  2,  1919 
July  2,  1919 
June  17,  1920 
July  2,  1919 
Nov.  26,  1919 
April  5,  1920 
July  16,  1919 
Sept.  18,  1919 
Nov.  26,  1919 
Feb.  3,  1920 


July  1,  1920 
July  1,  1920 
July  1,  1920 
Not  renewed 
July  1,  1920 
Not  renewed 
Not  renewed 
July  15,  1920 
Sept.  17,  1920 
Nov.  25,  1920 
Feb.  2,  1921 


TREE   workers'    INSTITUTE.  347 

TREE  WORKERS'  INSTITUTE 

The  early  examinations  indicated  that  many  of  the  apphcants 
were  not  well  versed  in  the  growth  and  care  of  trees,  yet  some  of 
these  men  had  conducted  a  fairly  successful  business  for  a  number 
of  years.  Evidently  they  knew  what  to  do  better  than  they  could 
tell  how  or  why  it  should  be  done.  To  the  members  of  the  Board  it 
seemed  unfair  to  refuse  certificates  to  such  men,  so  an  effort  was 
made  to  help  them  by  giving  them  the  proper  instruction  in  their 
work  ;  consequently  an  institute  was  held  at  the  Station  on  July 
22  and  23,  with  the  follqwing  program  :- 

Tuesday  Morning,  July  22 

10:00  A.  M.     How  a  Tree  Lives  and  Grows  (Illustrated).     Prof.  A.  H. 

Graves. 
11:00  Best  Species  of  Shade  Trees  for  Street  and  Home  Planting. 

Best  Methods  of  Planting  and  Guarding  Street  Trees. 
G.  A.  Cromie,  Supt.  of  Trees,  City  of  New  Haven. 
11:45  Discussion.     Led  by  E.  F.  Coe,  Elm  City  Nursery  Co.,  New 

Haven. 
12:00  Methods  of  Fertilizing  Trees.      Dr.  E.  H.  Jenkins,  Director, 

Conn.  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 

Tuesday  Afternoon 

2:00    P.  M.     Fungous  Diseases  of  Trees.       (Illustrated  by  Stereopticon.) 

Dr.  G.  P.  Clinton,  Botanist. 
3:00  Cavity  Work  and  Care  of  Mutilations. 

G.  A.  Cromie,  Supt.  of  Trees,  City  of  New  Haven. 
3 :30  The  Pruning  and  Spraying  of  Shade  Trees. 

G.  H.  HolUster,  Supt.  of  Keney  Park,  Hartford. 
4:00  Discussion.     Led  by  F.  A.  Bartlett,  Stamford. 

4:15  Question  Box. 

Tuesday  Evening 

7:30    P.M.     The  Tree  Doctor  and  the  Golden  Rule.    Dr.  E.  H.  Jenkins. 
8:15  Methods  of  Forest  Planting  and  Management.    (Illustrated 

by  Stereopticon.)  W.  O.  Filley,  Forester. 
9:00  Discussion.     Led  by  L.  F.   Harvey,   County  Agricultural 

Agent,  New  Haven. 
9:15  Question  Box. 

Wednesday  Morning,  July  23 

10:00  A.  M.     Some  Common  Insects  Attacking  Shade  and  Fruit  Trees. 

(Illustrated    by    Stereopticon.)    Dr.    W.    E.    Britton, 

Entomologist. 
11:00  The  Pruning  and  Spraying  of  Fruit  Trees.     (Illustrated  by 

Stereopticon.)      E.  M.  Stoddard,  Assistant  Botanist. 
11:30  Solid  Stream  Spraying  as  Practiced  in  Gipsy  Moth  Work. 

(Illustrated  by  Stereopticon.)  I.  W.  Davis,  Assistant 

Entomologist. 
12:00  Discussion.     Led  by  N.  A.  Millane,  Middletown. 

12:15  Question  Box. 

Notices  of  this  institute  were  sent  to  newspapers  and  to  all  tree 
workers,  including  the  tree  wardens  in  each  town  and  the  men  in 
charge  of  shade  trees  in  each  city  in  the  State.     Considering  the 


348         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN   231. 

number  of  such  men  interested,  the  attendance  was  rather  small, 
about  forty  being  present.  The  rainy  weather  no  doubt  kept  many 
away.  The  papers  were  full  of  interesting  information  and  there 
was  great  interest  shown  by  the  questions  and  discussions. 

At  that  time  it  was  planned  to  hold  further  institutes  but  this 
has  not  been  done,  as  the  need  for  it  has  in  part  at  least  subsided. 
It  was  also  thought  best  to  form  a  State  organization  of  tree  work- 
ers and  a  committee  was  elected  to  prepare  a  plan,  but  so  far 
nothing  further  has  developed. 

Financial  Statemen':^ 

Receipts 

From  65  examination  fees  @  $5.00  each $325 .  00 

53  renewal  fees  @  $2.00  each 106.00 


EXPENDITUKES 


$431.00 


Printing $59.70 

Postage 21 .  26 

Stationery 11 .  10 

Filing  Cabinets,  etc 62. 50 

Office  Supplies " 24. 18 

Traveling  Expenses  of  Board 38.28  217.02 

Balance  on  Hand  June  30,  1921  $213 .  98 

Dangers  Which  May  Arise 

Of  course  tree  workers  are  supposed  to  know  all  about  trees  and 
to  be  able  to  diagnose  troubles  on  sight.  Most  of  them  are  unable 
to  do  so,  and  many  of  our  best  specialists  can  do  so  only  after  a 
careful  examination.  Many  times,  evidence  is  lacking.  If 
evidence  can  be  obtained  and  the  tree  worker  is  in  doubt,  he  should 
submit  it  to  his  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  or  to  some  other 
institution  where  competent  speciaHsts  are  employed.  There  are 
many  cases  on  record  where  tree  workers  have  not  done  this,  but 
induced  the  owners  to  allow  them  to  give  treatment  at  considerable 
expense,  which  afterward  proved  useless.  Even  positive  injury 
has  resulted  in  some  instances.  It  is  human  nature  for  the  tree 
worker  to  disUke  to  say  that  he  does  not  know,  yet  an  honest 
man  frequently  must  do  so.  It  is  much  better  to  say  so  and  try  to 
find  out,  than  to  make  a  serious  mistake  by  giving  the  wrong 
treatment.  There  are  many  injuries  to  trees  which  are  non- 
parasitic in  their  nature,  for  which  the  usual  remedies  for  parasitic 
troubles  are  worthless. 

Then,  too,  some  owners  give  authority  for  certain  work  to  be 
done,  but  do  not  keep  in  close  touch  with  the  progress  of  it  and  are 
astounded  at  the  size  of  the  bill  when  finally  presented.  A  good 
way  of  keeping  check  on  the  cost  is  to  have  the  owner  or  his  agent 
approve  and  sign  the  time  slips  each  day  or  week,  as  the  case  may 
be. 


CONCERNING   THE    EMPLOYMENT    OF   TREE   WORKERS.         349 

The  Board  may  revoke  a  certificate  for  improper  work  done,  or 
if  dishonest  business  methods  are  followed  when  deahng  with 
clients.  The  Board  has  no  jurisdiction,  however,  over  legal  ques- 
tions, such  as  fixing  damages  in  a  case  of  violation  of  contract. 
Such  matters  must  go  to  the  courts  if  they  cannot  be  settled  to 
the  satisfaction  of  both  parties. 

Employ  Workers  Who  Hold  Certificates 

Unless  the  owner  is  acquainted  with  some  tree  worker  in  whom 
he  has  confidence,  it  is  safer  to  employ  only  those  men  or  firms 
who  hold  certificates  from  this  Board.  It  is  true  that  the  law 
permits  a  tree  worker  to  practice  without  a  certificate  in  the  town 
of  which  he  is  a  legal  resident,  but  this  provision  was  included  for 
the  purpose  of  allowing  farmers  and  orchardists  to  employ  men  to 
do  the  necessary  spraying  and  pruning  of  their  orchards.  It  is  a 
question  if  city  tree  workers  should  have  been  allowed  to  do  this. 
However,  the  exception  is  clear  in  the  law  and  must  stand  until 
changed. 

If  a  tree  worker  soHcits  work  from  you,  ask  him  if  he  or  his  firm 
has  passed  the  examination  and  holds  the  certificate  of  this 
Board.  If  not,  tell  him  that  you  prefer  some  one  who  holds  a 
state  certificate.  This  will  help  to  induce  all  workers  to  apply  for 
the  examination  and  certificate,  according  to  the  provisions  of  the 
law.  The  names  of  those  who  have  received  certificates  from  the 
Board  are  given  on  pages  345  and  346. 

Complaints  Will  be  Investigated 

The  Board  cannot  guarantee  the  work  of  any  one,  even  though 
a  certificate  has  been  issued  to  him,  but  requests  that  written 
complaints  of  unsatisfactory  work,  discourteous  treatment,  or 
improper  business  methods  be  filed  with  the  Secretary.  So  far  as 
may  be  possible,  such  complaints  will  be  investigated  and  the 
findings  will  be  recorded  and  furnished  to  both  parties  concerne.d. 
If  the  tree  worker  is  at  fault  and  the  circumstances  warrant,  his 
certificate  may  be  revoked. 

The  Board  also  invites  complaints  regarding  tree  workers  who 
are  operating  in  violation  of  the  law,  and  will  foUow  up  all  such 
complaints  wherever  feasible. 

A  Partial  List  of  Publications  Relating  to  the  Care  op  Trees 

Bailey,  L.  H.,  "The  Pruning  Manual,"  The  Macmillan  Co.,  New  York, 
1919. 

Blakeslee,  A.  F.,  and  Jarvis,  C.  D.,  "Trees  in  Winter,"  The  Macmillan 
Co.,  York,   1913. 

Collins,  J.  F.,  "Tree  Surgery,"  Farmers'  Bulletin  No.  1178,  U.  S.  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  C,  1920. 

Fernow,  B.  E.,  "The  Care  of  Trees,"  Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  New  York,  1910. 

Houser,  J.  S,,  "Destructive  Insects  Affecting  Shade  and  Forest  Trees," 
Bulletin  332,  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  Wooster,  Ohio,  1918. 


350         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN   231. 

Kotinsky,  Jacob,  "Insects  Injurious  to  Deciduous  Shade  Trees  and  Their 
Control,"  Farmers'  Bulletin  No.  1169,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture, Washington,  D.  C,   1921. 

Levison,  J.  J.,  "Studies  of  Trees,"  John  Wiley  &  Sons,  New  York,  1914. 

Peets,  Elbert,  "Practical  Tree  Repair,"  McBride,  Nast  &  Co.,  New  York, 
1913. 

Rankin,  W.  F.,  "Manual  of  Tree  Diseases,"  The  Macmillan  Co.,  New 
York,  1918. 

Solotaroff,  William,  "Shade  Trees  in  Towns  and  Cities,"  John  Wiley  & 
Sons,  New  York,  1911. 

Stone,  G.  E.,  "Shade  Trees,  Characteristics,  Adaptation,  Diseases  and 
Care,"  Bulletin  No.  170,  Massachusetts  Agricultural  Experiment 
Station,  Amherst,   Mass.,   1916. 

Also,  the  bulletins  and  reports  of  this  Station,  and  of  other 
Agricultural  Experiment  Stations,  and  of  the  United  States  De- 
partment of  Agriculture,  treat  of  special  subjects  relating  to  trees. 
If  available,  these  may  be  obtained  free  on  request.  It  is  recom- 
mended tha  tree  workers  obtain  these  pubUcations  and  use  them 
for  reference  in  connection  with  their  work. 

The  foregoing  report  has  been  approved  and  adopted  as  the 
First  Report  of  the  Tree  Protection  Examining  Board.  It  is 
intended  to  issue  future  reports  biennially  covering  the  activities 
of  the  Board  under  the  provisions  of  the  law. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

W.  E.  Britton,  Entomologist, 

Chairman. 

W.  O.  FiLLEY,  Forester, 

Secretary  and  Treasurer. 

G.  P.  Clinton,  Botanist. 


TOP-DRESSING   MEADOW. 


351 


AN  EXPERIMENT  IN  TOP-DRESSING  A  RUN- 
OUT MEADOW 

By  E.  H.  Jenkins 

The  meadow  was  acquired  in  1915.  Its  previous  cropping  was 
unknown  but  its  average  annual  yield  for  the  following  six  years 
was  1.01  tons  per  acre  of  poor  hay  much  mixed  with  weeds.  Seven- 
teen plots  were  established,  14  feet  wide  and  155|  feet  long,  each 
one-twentieth  of  an  acre.  Four-foot  strips  separated  the  plots. 
The  top-dressings  were  applied  early  each  year.  The  hay  from 
all  the  plots  was  weighed  on  the  same  day.  The  yields  of  the 
cfiecks  show  an  increased  natural  jdeld  from  No.  1  to  No.  17,  and 
the  "gains"  have  been  corrected  as  required  by  this  difference  in 
the  check  plots.  For  two  years  no  potash  could  be  applied  to 
plot  8,  and  in  1920  an  equivalent  amount  of  muriate  was  used  in 
place  of  kainit. 

The  arrangement  of  the  plots,  their  treatment  and  the  corrected 
average  results  of  the  six  years  cropping  appear  in  the  following 
table 


Plot 

Tons  of 

Corrected 

Cost  of 

Cost  of 

No. 

Febtilizek 

Hay 

Gain  in 

Fertilizer 

Fertilizer 

Per  Acre 

Tona 

1915 

1919 

1 

None 

2.3  tons  manure 

0.80 
1.57 

2 

0.56 

$   8.05 

$12.65 

3 

250  lbs.  nitrate 

1.98 

0.97 

6.88 

12.50 

4 

175  lbs.  nitrate  +  150  lbs.  bone.  . 

1.74 

0.73 

7.45 

12.65 

5 

None 

250  lbs.   nitrate    +  200  lbs.  acid 

0.71 

6 

phosphate 

1.96 

0.96 

8.18 

15.85 

7 

250  lbs.  nitrate  +  190  lbs.   basic 

slag 

2.05 

1.04 

8.49 

* 

8 

250  lbs.  nitrate  +  200  lbs.    acid 

phos.  +  130  lbs.  kainit 

2.10 

1.10 

9.09 

* 

9 

None 

0.97 

10 

Double  quantity  of  2 

1.69 

0.68 

16.10 

25.30 

11 

«              "            "3 

2.09 

1.08 

13.76 

25.00 

12 

«                           «                       «      A 

1.47 

0.46 

14.90 

25.30 

13 

None 

1.01 

14 

Double  quantity  of  No.   6 

2.44 

1.43 

16.36 

31.70 

15 

u                  u               a       u       y 

2.43 

1.42 

16.98 

* 

16 

a                  u               t(       ((       o 

3.19 

2.13 

18.18 

* 

17 

None 

1.10 

*Basic  slag  and  kainit  were  not  available  in  1919. 

CERTIFICATION  OF  BABCOCK  TEST  APPARATUS 

As  provided  by  statute  the  Station  tests  the  accuracy  of  Bab- 
cock  apparatus  which  is  used  for  determining  the  value  of  milk  or 
cream.  Each  piece  thus  tested  is  permanently  marked  with  the 
Station  initials^  CT.  AG.  ST.  if  it  is  accurately  graduated:  BAD 
if  it  is  inaccurate. 


352         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN   231. 

Since  our  last  report  2,102  pieces  have  been  tested  of  which  43, 
or  about  two  percent,  were  bad. 

SORGHUM  JUICE 

A  single  test  of  juice  from  Early  Amber  Sorghum  grown  at  Mt. 
Carmel  gave  the  following  result: 

Sucrose  (Cane  sugar) 7. 35% 

Invert  sugar 3 .  29 

Total  sugars 10. 64 

Undetermined  solids 1 .  87 

Total  solids 12. 51  ■ 

TEST  OF  PERILLA 

Perilla  frutescens  is  grown  extensively  in  Japan  for  the  oil  in  its 
seeds.  In  1917  the  Institute  of  Industrial  Research  asked  the 
co-operation  of  this  Station  in  testing  its  growth  in  this  part  of  the 
country. 

The  seed  was  planted  in  drills  18  inches  apart  about  3  inches 
apart  in  the  row. 

The  planting  was  made  May  31st,  as  weather  and  labor  condi- 
tions made  earher  planting  impossible. 

On  September  18th,  the  plants  had  a  maximum  height  of  50 
inches,  average  44-46  inches,  and  were  beginning  to  blossom. 

They  were  sparsely  branched  mostly  near  the  root,  and  had 
already  been  shghtly  touched  by  frost.  A  short  time  later  they 
were  killed  by  cold. 

We  judge  that,  in  this  region,  seed  could  only  be  produced  by 
starting  the  plants  in  the  greenhouse  and  later  setting  them  in  the 
field. 

EFFECTS  OF  BORAX  ON  THE  GROWTH  OF  POTATOES, 
CORN  AND  BEANS 

By  E.  H.  Jenkins 

In  consequence  of  the  lack  of  German  potash  salts  during  the 
war,  various  domestic  sources  of  potash  were  exploited  and  their 
output  eagerly  sought  and  used. 

Occasional  injury  or  total  loss  of  crops  led  to  careful  search  for 
the  cause,  which  in  widely  separated  districts  was  not  at  first 
evident.  It  was  found  that  the  domestic  potash  obtained  from 
certain  sources  contained  notable  quantities  of  borax,  which  in 
relatively  small  amounts  is  a  plant  poison,  and  it  was  proved  that 
in  some  cases  the  injuries  noted  were  certainly  caused  by  borax  in 
the  fertilizer.  Further  study  of  the  poisonous  effect  of  borax  and 
the  Hmits  of  its  toxicity  seemed  to  the  directors  of  the  New  Eng- 
land, New  York  and  New  Jersey  Stations  to  be  immediately 
necessary,  and  it  was  evident  that  such  a  study  could  be  carried 


EFFECTS    OF   BORAX    ON    VEGETATION.  353 

out  best  as  a  single  joint  project,  each  Station  bearing  its  propor- 
tionate part  of  the  expense  involved.  This  Station  joined  with 
the  others  in  this  study. 

Director  Hills  of  the  Vermont  Station  placed  a  suitable  green- 
house at  the  disposal  of  the  co-operating  Stations,  Director  Woods 
and  Dr.  Morse,  pathologist  of  the  Maine  Station,  assembled  the 
materials  and  prepared  detailed  plans,  Director  Lipman  of  the 
New  Jersey  Station  selected  a  trained  experimenter  to  take  charge 
of  the  greenhouse  work,  and  the  experiments  were  carried  out  dur- 
ing 1920.  The  met.hod  and  results  were  pubHshed  in  Soil  Science 
Vol.  XII,  No.  2,  pp  79-106,  13  plates  August  1921,  with  the  title, 
"Effect  Upon  the  Growth  of  Potatoes,  Corn  and  Beans  Resulting 
from  the  Addition  of  Borax  to  the  Fertihzers  Used.  J.  P. 
Neller  and  W.  J.  Morse." 

Tiie  general  summary  is  as  follows: 

"Plants  were  uninjured  where  fertilizer  mixtures  made  Trom 
borax-free  chemicals  were  applied  to  soil  in  pots  in  which  potatoes, 
corn  and  beans  were  grown.  These  crops  were  injured  where  the 
pots  contained  the  same  soil  and  the  same  fertihzer  mixtures  in 
like  quantity,  provided  sufficient  amounts  of  borax  were  added 
with  the  fertihzer.  The  same  types  of  injury  were  produced,  in 
somewhat  greater  degree,  when  a  commercial  fertilizer  carrying 
equivalent  amounts  of  borax  was  applied. 

"Corn  and  beans  were  more  susceptible  to  the  injurious  effects  of 
borax  than  were  potatoes.  Under  the  conditions  of  the  experiment, 
anhydrous  borax  at  the  rate  of  3  pounds  per  acre  was  the  largest 
amount  that  could  be  apphed  in  drills  with  safety  to  beans.  The 
hmit  for  corn  is  somewhat  under  5  pounds,  and  for  potatoes 
shghtly  above  5  pounds  per  acre.  Borax  apphed  with  the  fertihzer 
below  the  seed  or  seedpiece  proved  more  toxic  in  all  cases  than 
where  applied  above  in  hke  manner.  Mixing  the  borax  and 
fertihzer  with  the  soil  decreased  the  injury  and  shghtly  raised  the 
amount  that  could  be  apphed  per  acre  with  safety. 

"Evidence  was  obtained  that  apphcations  of  hme  prevented 
some  of  the  injury  to  potatoes.  The  tests  with  gypsum  and  muan- 
ure  were  not  conclusive  with  this  crop.  All  three  of  these  materials 
seemed  to  reduce  the  toxic  effects  on  corn.  Lime  was  beneficial 
with  beans,  but  gypsum  and  manure  did  not  show  any  appreciable 
influence. 

"The  above  resiilts  were  all  obtained  with  soil  at  an  optimum 
wafer  content  of  19.2  per  cent.  A  subsequent  test  with  beans 
showed  that  more  injury  occurred  where  the  soil  moisture  was 
maintained  at  15.2  per  cent,  than  where  it  was  30.4  per  cent. 

"The  only  indication  of  possible  stimulation  due  to  the  presence 
of  small  amounts  of  boron  occurred  with  corn,  but  the  evidence 
was   inconclusive." 

The  Station  has  a  few  reprints  of  this  paper  which  can  be  given 
to  persons  specially  interested  in  the  technique  followed. 


354         CONNECTICUT   EXPERIMENT   STATION    BULLETIN    231. 

TIMOTHY  AS  A  COVER  CROP  FOR  TOBACCO  LAND 

By  E.  H.  Jenkins 

Various  experimenters  have  made  observations  on  the  amount 
of  vegetable  matter  and  plant  food  left  in  the  soil  by  the  stubble 
and  roots  of  crops.    Among  these  may  be  cited: 

Heiden,  Diingelehre,  I,  p.  72,  1866,  and  III,  p.  243,  1872,  notes  the  work 
of  Boussingault,  John,  Schubart,  Hellriegel,  Dietrich  and  others. 

Hopkins,  Soil  Fertility  and  Permanent  Agriculture  p.  218,  1910,  gives 
statistics  on  the  amount  of  dry  matter  and  plant  food  in  various  legumes 
and  cites  the  observations  of  others. 

Penny,  Delaware  Station,  Bulletin  67,  1905,  reports  observations  on  the 
root  system  of  crimson  clover  at  various  periods  of  growth. 

In  the  report  of  the  Connecticut  Board  of  Agriculture,  1871,  p.  95, 
notice  is  given  of  Weiske's  observations  at  Proskau,  on  the  composition 
of  roots  and  stubble  of  a  number  of  crops.    (Versuchs-St.  14,  p.  107,  1871.) 

Woods,  Storrs  Station  Report,  1888,  p.  28,  reports  Observations  on  the 
Quantity  and  Composition  of  Roots  of  Clover,  Timothy,  Wheat  and 
Other  Plants,  taken  at  time  of  harvest  in  Maine. 

The  observations  here  to  be  noted  do  not  admit  of  close  com- 
parison with  those  referred  to  above,  for  these  reasons:  They 
were  made  on  young,  green  crops  to  be  plowed  under  for  manure. 
The  sowing  was  somewhat  heavier  than  would  be  practiced  if  the 
crop  were  to  be  harvested  and  it  was  grown  on  tobacco  land,  and 
therefore  on  very  heavily  fertilized  soil. 

The  observations  specially  concern  or  only  concern  tobacco 
growers. 

It  is  matter  of  common  knowledge  and  common  complaint 
among  tobacco  growers  in  the  Connecticut  valley  that  on  many 
fields  the  yield  of  tobacco  has  gradually  decreased. 

No  appreciable  loss  of  quahty  in  the  leaf  is  noted  but  only  an 
unsatisfactory  yield  per  acre. 

This  cannot  be  attributed  to  lack  of  fertilizer  for  increased 
applications  and  changes  in  the  fertilizer  formulas  have  not  im- 
proved this  condition. 

The  cause  of  the  trouble  is  not  known  and  can  only  be  surmised, 
but  it  has  been  noticed  in  some  cases  that  resting  the  land  by 
growing  other  crops  for  a  few  years  restored  the  soil,  so  that  the 
jdeld  of  tobacco  became  satisfactory  again. 

But  this  change  of  crops  is  both  inconvenient  and  expensive. 
The  tobacco  grower  usually  specializes  in  the  one  crop. 

His  barns,  tools  and  help  cannot  conveniently  be  shifted  to  the 
raising  of  other  crops  at  any  profit. 

This  condition  has  raised  the  question  whether  the  restoration 
of  the  land  cannot  be  effected  gradually,  if  not  immediately,  by 
growing  some  kind  of  cover  crop  between  successive  tobacco 
crops,  sowing  the  seed  as  soon  as  possible  after  harvesting  tobacco 
and  keeping  the  cover  crop  on  the  land  until  it  has  to  be  broken  up 
in  the  spring  and  fitted  for  the  next  crop. 

Several  well-known  growers  have  followed  this  plan  consistently 
for  a  number  of  years  and  have  obtained  very  favorable  results, 


TIMOTHY    A    COVER    CROP   FOR   TOBACCO.  355 

some  of  which  are  reported  in  the  Hartford  County  Farm  News 
for  August,  1919. 

Various  cover  crops  have  been  suggested  and  tried.  The 
nitrogen-gathering  crops,  vetches,  clovers,  soy  beans  and  the  like 
have  no  special  value  over  the  cereals  on  tobacco  lands,  because 
they  do  not  exercise  their  nitrogen-gathering  function  where 
nitrogen  is  fairly  abundant  in  the  soil  already,  as  is  the  case  on 
highly  fertilized  tobacco  fields. 

There  is  the  further  objection  to  their  use  that  certain  legumes 
are  natural  hosts  of  the  dreaded  Tliielavia  or  root  rot  disease; 
moreover  they  make  no  such  growth  through  the  colder  season  as 
do  the  cereals  and  other  grasses. 

Of  these  rye  has  been,  and  is,  quite  commonly  used.  The  trradi- 
tion  that  it  sours  the  land  has  no  basis  in  fact,  but  one  sound  ob- 
jection to  it  is  its  very  rapid  growth  in  spring.  If  it  is  not  turned 
under  at  just  the  right  time  it  becomes  too  ''woody"  and  when 
turned  under  decays  but  slowly  and  leaves  the  soil  too  loose  and 
open.  If  rye  is  used  it  should  be  sown  at  the  rate  of  a  bushel  and  a 
half  to  the  acre. 

Timothy  is  now  being  tried  and  so  far  has  given  good  satisfac- 
tion. It  makes  slow  growth  above  ground  and  never  gets  too 
rank  or  woody  before  the  time  for  plowing,  but  it  forms  a  thick 
mat  of  very  fine  roots  which  fill  the  soil  to  the  depth  of  six  or 
eight  inches  and  takes  up  from  it  surprisingly  large  amounts 
of  plant  food.  It  can  be  sown  thicker  than  is  usual  in  seeding 
down  for  a  hay  crop.  Half  a  bushel  of  timothy  seed  per  acre 
should  be  enough.  It  should  be  sown  as  early  as  is  possible. 
Where  tobacco  is  primed  the  seed  may  be  sown  after  the  second 
priming.  Some  wait  until  the  tobacco  is  harvested  and  the  stalk 
disk-harrowed. 

We  urge  tobacco  growers  ivho  are  concerned  with  diminishing 
yields  on  their  fields  to  test  timothy  as  a  cover  crop  for  at  least  three 
years  in  succession!,  sowing  early,  with  a  fairly  heavy  seeding.  It  is 
the  only  alternative  in  sight  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  dropping  tobacco 
and  growing  other  crops  for  a  time;  and  the  experience  of  some  growers 
has  shown  its  value  in  restoring  production. 

Apart  from  the  use  of  cover  crops  as  a  corrective  for  failing 
tobacco  soils,  they  are  always  needed  as  a  protection  from  the 
drifting  of  the  soils  in  high  winds,  from  their  washing  in  heavy 
rains  and  from  the  leaching  of  the  plant  food  in  them.  Whenever 
the  land  is  unfrozen,  timothy  and  rye  are  alwaj^s  growing  and 
gathering  and  holding  the  soluble  plant  food  in  the  soil  for  the 
following  crop  and  adding  to  it  a  store  of  organic  material  got 
largely  from  the  air. 

Within  the  last  two  years  some  observations  have  been  made  by 
Mr.  B.  G.  Southwick,  the  Hartford  County  Agent,  Mr.  Henry 
Dorsey,  Extension  Agronomist,  and  the  writer,  to  determine  how 
much  organic  matter  and  plant  food  a  timothy  cover  crop  might 
gather  from  a  tobacco  soil  and  hold  for  the  tobacco  crop. 


356  CONNECTICUT    EXPERIMENT   STATION   BULLETIN    231. 

The  samples,  usually  five  in  each  field,  were  taken  with  a  six 
inch  iron  tube,  driven  down  six  or  seven  inches.  The  cores  thus 
obtained  with  the  roots  and  top  growth,  were  very  carefully  washed 
out  by  the  writer,  on  fine  sieves,  and  when  partially  dried  were 
cleaned  as  far  as  possible  of  all  adhering  soil  and  foreign  matters 
and   then   analyzed. 

While  some  roots  go  much  deeper  than  seven  inches  their  total 
weight  is  relatively''  very  small. 

The  averages  of  the  five  samples  taken  from  each  field  are  given 
below. 

A.,  B.  and  C.  were  taken  May  8,  1919,  just  before  the  crop  was 
turned  under.  The  top  growth  was  six  to  eight  inches  high.  A 
from- land  of  D.  E.  Newberry,  South  Windsor,  B  from  Windsor 
Tobacco  Corporation,  Windsor,  C  from  S.  F.  Brown,  Poquonock. 

D.  E.  F.  were  taken  in  the  late  fall  of  1919  and  show  what  had 
been  taken  by  the  crop  before  winter.  D  from  J.  W.  Alsop,  Avon, 
E  from  J.  E.  Phelps,  Suffield  F  from  D.  E.  Newberry,  South 
Windsor. 

G.  and  H.  were  taken  in  May,  1920,  just  before  plowing.  H  is  a 
mixture  of  timothy  and  alsike  clover.  In  1920  timothy  did  not 
make  nearly  as  good  a  growth  as  in  the  previous  year  on  account  of 
unfavorable  weather  conditions  and  farmers  generally  did  not 
have  as  good  cover  crops  as  usual. 

The  samples  were  taken  from  different  fields,  probably  unHke 
in  soil,  moisture  conditions  and  fertihty,  so  that  no  veiy  close 
agreement  in  results  was  to  be  expected. 

But  in  general  they  indicate  that  an  even,  thick  stand  of  timothy 
may  contain,  when  'plowed  under,  not  Jar  from  three  tons  of  vegetable 
matter,  100  pounds  of  nitrogen,  50  of  phosphoric  acid  and  more  than 
100  pounds  of  potash  for  the  use  of  the  following  crop. 

To  fix  a  valuation  on  this  material  is  hardly  possible. 

If  we  calculate  that  forty  per  cent,  of  the  nitrogen  is  available 
to  the  coming  crop  and  half  of  the  phosphoric  acid  and  potash, 
we  find  a  valuation  of  about  131.00. 

But  the  value  of  three  tons  of  vegetable  matter,  quite  wideh^ 
and  evenly  distributed  in  the  soil  it  is  impossible  to  estimate. 

Pounds  Per  Acre  of  Organic  Matter  and  Plant  Food  Contained 
In  a  Cover  Crop  of  Timothy  Grown  on  Tobacco  Soil 

Spring,  1919 

A.  So.  Windsor, 

B.  Windsor, 

C.  Poquonock, 
Average 

Fall,  1919 

D.  Avon 

E.  Suffield, 

F.  So.  Windsor, 
Average 

Spring,  1920 

G.  Suffield, 
H.  So.  Windsor, 


Organic 
Mattbe. 

NiTKOGEN. 

Phosphoric 
Acid. 

Potash. 

7860 
6099 
7112 
7020 

176 
185 
160 
173 

70 
75 

72 
72 

173 
183 
150 

168 

2813 
2015 

1398 
2075 

68.2 
60.2 
39.4 
55. 

31.5 
28.2 

17.8 
9             25.8 

61.2 
49.2 
28.3 
46 

5060 
6693 

94.8 
90.4 

37.8 
57.6 

117.0 
131.5 

University  of 
Connecticut 

Libraries 


l-.-.T,',/' ■  -J-  .  -.VV  ■.,•'■'»■       V    ■• 

I- ,r  T" .      '^,"-     .      '■'  .  v..  .-'1-   ■■'■..' 


;?;^ 


;■*.■;-. 


;      v. ,  -  -*,! 

■  ■  ■^ 

■    A    "■'»:  .< 

'.,  >,  - 

,j;...".  '" 

";','- 

^.•^ 

vr-. 


